Foster v. Collier ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                 appellant challenges the district court's rejection of his counterclaim.        See
    Consol. Generator-Neu., Inc. v. Cummins Engine Co., 
    114 Nev. 1304
    , 1312,
    
    971 P.2d 1251
    , 1256 (1998) (recognizing that a party may challenge
    interlocutory orders entered before a final judgment in an appeal from the
    final judgment).
    Turning to the merits of appellant's challenge to the rejection
    of his counterclaims, having considered appellant's civil proper person
    appeal statement and the record on appeal, we affirm the district court's
    denial of his motion to submit a counterclaim, as appellant's proposed
    counterclaim failed to state a cognizable claim against respondent. 1 Cf.
    Halcrow, Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 129 Nev. „ 
    302 P.3d 1148
    , 1152 (2013) (explaining that leave to amend a complaint should be
    denied if the proposed amendment would be futile because it attempts to
    plead an impermissible claim); Buzz Stew, LLC v. City of N. Las Vegas,
    
    124 Nev. 224
    , 228, 
    181 P.3d 670
    , 672 (2008) (providing that a complaint
    should be dismissed "if it appears beyond a doubt that [the plaintiff] could
    prove no set of facts, which, if true, would entitle [him or her] to relief).
    It is so ORDERED.
    J.
    1S4ekr
    Parraguirre                   .
    'Although the district court denied appellant's motion to submit a
    counterclaim on the ground that no such motion was available to
    appellant, we may affirm the district court's order if it reached the correct
    result, albeit for a different reason. See Butler ex rel. Biller v. Bayer, 
    123 Nev. 450
    , 460 n.22, 
    168 P.3d 1055
    , 1063 n.22 (2007).
    SUPREME COURT
    OF
    NEVADA
    2
    (0) 1947A
    cc: Hon. James Todd Russell, District Judge
    John Michael Foster
    Steven J. Klearman & Associates
    Carson City Clerk
    SUPREME COURT
    OF
    NEVADA
    3
    (0) 1947A    me